Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Conceptions
of Library and Information Science—"Featuring the Future". Educational Forum paper

The case for curriculum reform in Australian information management & library and information science education: Part 1., Technology and digitization as drivers

Hairong Yu and
Mari Davis
Information Management Research Group, School of Information Systems, Technology
and Management, The University of New South Wales, Sydney NSW 2052, Australia

Abstract

Introduction. Against a background of declining enrolments
and closure of schools, information professionals and educators in Australia
have expressed concerns about education for information. The aim of this study
then is to formally canvass views and thinking about these concerns with stakeholders
- academics, educators, library managers and students.Method. A semi-structured interview process was used for
getting the story behind each participant's experience. Questions began with
a 'stimulus' quotation from recent literature and were open-ended in nature.
A stratified purposive sample of information professionals for whom information management or library and information science
is an essential component of their occupation was used. Interviews, conducted
during June to August 2006, were tape-recorded and transcribed.Analysis. Context and meaning in the interviews was explored
through content analysis using NVivo™ software. The grounded theory
approach to data analysis drew out major themes and concerns of participants.
Use of several coders and monitoring for consistency ensured the reliability
of classifications. Results. Responses mainly from educators and academics are
discussed in this paper. A framework of significant changes to the information
environment as seen by the information professionals interviewed is presented.
Analysis focuses on the impact of changes experienced and on reforms they
suggest for the education sector. Four broad themes emerge from the data:
changes driven by technological innovations; a confirmation of the basic core
knowledge; the need for broadening the scope of education programmes; and relationships
with neighboring information fields. Work on the analysis of interviews is
ongoing. Conclusions. Findings to date indicate that academics and
educators think that information management or library and information science education in Australia needs reform. They also
point to necessary adjustments to content in order to prepare graduates for
expanding career opportunities and roles in business, industry, and non-traditional
settings as well as in traditional settings and services.

Introduction

All professions and disciplines encounter change from within and externally,
and to move forward successfully, change and evolution are necessary. Developments
in the area of information technology, communication networks, the Internet
and the World Wide Web, as well as the digitization of information of all kinds
have set the scene for changes in many spheres, and in particular for Australian
Information Management and Library and Information Science. Over
the last ten years, university information management or library and information science programmes have experienced erratic or declining
numbers of enrolments, closure of some library and information science schools, and changing employment
opportunities for graduates. There is a need to re-think or re-conceptualize
education for information in a much broader context – a context encompassing
many areas of knowledge and expertise that are relevant to every sector and
industry, not only the so-called information-sector.

Tensions and reforms in the Australian higher education sector and their undeniable
implications for library and information science education are covered by Hallam (2006)
and Harvey (2001). Two papers expand the discussion by
also providing historical context relating to the problems faced (Carroll
2002; Harvey & Higgins 2003). Logan and Hsieh-Yee
(2001) ably described changes in library and information science education in the American
context. These contexts are global in reach, and also apply to Australia.

Trends first observed in the US are often replicated in Australia, generally
about 5-10 years later. For example, Australia began experiencing the closure
of schools in the mid-1990s; Australia also experienced the amalgamation or
merger of small specialized schools into larger and more powerful faculties.
As in the US, when competition for scarce university funds intensified, Australia
struggled to maintain the number of library and information science schools it had in the 1980s with many
closing in the late 1990s (ALIA 2007).

As in the US, Australia re-branded information science and library programmes
by giving less prominence to library locations or settings for practice. In
some instances, moves towards broadening the curricula were made to include
more focus on digital and technological content and on business, commercial
and non-traditional applications. These trends have been observed among schools
that were merged during the late-1990s with larger faculties such as business,
commerce or information systems and technology. There has been concern also
over core knowledge and competencies in Australia. However, these concerns occupy
less prominence in the face of shifts towards educating graduates to work in
broader information environments and to consider new career paths in non-traditional
agencies and organizations. Other reasons for change particularly in the Australian
library and information science context include an aging academic staff profile, and the vexed and unresolved
issue of whether to provide undergraduate programmes or to concentrate on post-graduate
Masters’ and doctoral programmes.

Australia has yet to debate publicly the issues of convergence and collaboration
with related information fields, although Harvey (2001)
canvassed the idea of a Distributed Learning Network for information management or library and information science in Australia.
However, universities here are so strapped for funds that discussions of the
educational options possible among converging information disciplines such as
represented by the “ISchool” phenomenon in the US or Europe, have
not been given adequate airplay. Added to anxieties in the Australian context
is a view among higher education administration that publication and research
outputs of information management or library and information science faculty are less valued or are seen as less research-oriented
than those of other disciplines; an especially pertinent point as Australia
moves towards the new Research Quality Framework (2007)
with measures that are based on a science-based model of publication performance.

In an attempt to kick-start discussions among stakeholders, the UNSW Information
Management Research Group, under the John Metcalfe Foundation programme, created
its “Education4Information’ Project in 2006. Interviews were undertaken
during late 2006 in four Australian States with academic and teaching faculty
in IM, IS (Information Systems), or library and information science programmes, university administrators,
and librarians in various practice and industry environments. The project plans
to expand the sample in 2008 to undertake more interviews in the disciplines
of IS, KM (Knowledge Management) and IT. For this segment of the Project, staff
with computer science, IT or IS training and qualifications in academia, business
and industry, and in government organizations would be targeted. In this paper,
responses mainly from information management, library and information science and knowledge management educators are described.

Methodology

A semi-structured interview process was adopted for getting the story behind
each participant’s experience. The 14 item schedule allowed for open-ended
responses; each item began with a ‘stimulus’ quotation from recent
literature. Interviews, lasting approximately 45
minutes each, were taped and subsequently transcribed.

A non-random stratified interview sample of ‘experts’ for whom
information management or library and information science is an essential component of their occupation (N=22) was drawn from four
Australian states on the eastern seaboard (see Appendix 1). General career or
occupational designations are used when excerpts from interviews are quoted
in order to preserve respondents’ anonymity.

The conceptual approach taken is based on grounded
theory using qualitative content analysis (Glaser &
Strauss 1976; Strauss & Corbin 1998).
Content analysis method is used because of its power in exploring context, meaning
and semantic relationships, from the transcripts of interviews (Berg
2006). The method provides for careful, detailed and systematic examination
of communications to identify patterns, themes, biases, and meanings.
The NVivo™ software package allowed us to categorize the content,
and to identify trends, as well as similarities and differences of opinion.
Categorization followed an iterative process in which there was referral back
to the transcripts of interviews for verification of context. The reliability
of the coding was ensured by using several independent coders, and by monitoring
and comparing coding to achieve consistency and stability of concepts. Through
this process, the major themes and concerns of participants emerged from the
data and not from a preconceived subject classification.

This paper presents
data related to technology use and associated educational reforms. The framework
presented in Figure 1 emerged from the data (using grounded theory), rather
than from prior notions or theories about
educational reform or agendas.
The framework is based on the frequency of comment made by respondents.
It shows that triggers for change arise
from new uses of technology and communication networks. It also shows that facilitators
for reform include society’s expectations about education for careers
and jobs. Workplace requirements and expectations
as triggers and facilitators of change, however, are the subject of another
paper, and are not discussed here.

Analysis

This paper reports on what respondents expressed as the important triggers,
facilitators and barriers in the following inter-connected areas. These are
listed below. The data are derived from responses to 9 questions (64%) from
16 participants (76%) (See Appendices 1 and 2).

Information technology and usage

Core knowledge for information management or library and information science

Educational reforms for information disciplines

Convergence and multi-disciplinary alliances.

Figure 1: Conceptual
Framework of Triggers of Change

Information technology and usage

Our respondents were asked to identify the major drivers of change in their
areas of work in libraries or information services, as educators, and as administrators
in libraries or educational institutions. Whatever their career status, interviewees
identified similar drivers or triggers of change, and emphasized positive aspects
of change, such as greater access to information resources, speed of access,
and new ways of connecting to people.

Technological change pertinent to the world of information service and delivery
was a focus. Respondents mentioned changes brought about by ICTs within the
profession and in business and that computers and other information and communication
technologies have infiltrated into the everyday life of many people.

There was universal acknowledgement that the Internet, the Web, and information
and communication technologies (ICTs) have acted as change agents in many fields
and professions, and particularly for the information professions. Respondents
identified the nature and extent of impacts they experienced from these areas,
and provided views of ways to respond to such change. The themes and topics
raised are illustrated by verbatim quotes to indicate varying levels of meaning
and nuance, and differences in their experience.

Interviewees frequently talked about the impact of the Internet and the networking
of information as having changed the way people do their work. Some describe
how these triggers also changed their own work behaviour and practice. Some older
respondents are critical of student reliance on the Internet rather than using
the library, but as one early-career librarian points out:

What is different now
relates to the kind of information people want – now they prefer online
and interactive services – the current generation is pro interactive
information.

The situation is bluntly stated by a senior administrator in an academic library:

The Internet is used
and that’s that … If we don’t come to grips with the use
of the Internet in libraries and elsewhere, we’re lost to the users.

However, one educator accepts the reality of users preferring to search for
information on the Web:

Google is not the end
of libraries. On the contrary, Google is the friend of libraries because it
has made people more conscious of accessing information and also more conscious
of the rubbish they find – so the role of the trained intermediary is
becoming more important.

Respondents also acknowledge that the Internet changed their modes of working
dramatically. One young academic in a teaching department says:

Access to the Internet
has changed the teaching environment and the way one has to teach now. It
changes the way you have to approach teaching. Many of the undergraduates
feel they ‘know it all’ and it is difficult to get them to understand
[that] there is something worthwhile for them to learn about how to search
and strategize searching better. This is challenging.

Libraries were very early adopters of computers with hardware and software solutions
to a range of crucial activities, such as building online catalogues and sharing
cataloguing through networked services. Online database use, particularly for
bibliographic purposes and abstracting services, has a long history. However,
despite long usage of computers in library settings, a number of interviewees
mention the difficulties that mature-age career-changers still encounter in
learning IT and adapting to the ubiquitous use of computers in the workplace.
These career-changers are being taught alongside younger students many of whom
arrive with well developed computer skills. This means that library and information science and information management programmes
are forced teach IT at introductory levels that leave students with good IT
backgrounds dissatisfied.

A senior educator deplores the fact that even in 2006 'Â we still have
to teach a great deal of IT because skills of students in this area are lacking.”
Looking further ahead, this educator suggests that: 'Â because
IT changes often and is so dynamic, perhaps we will always have to teach a certain
amount of IT”. Younger interviewees propose that it should be assumed
that students “…come with the basic suite of online and ICT skills.
One strongly puts the view that: “ICT is …not part of the
[library and information science] course at all.”

These findings accord with the “significant confusion over what every
librarian should understand about IT” noted by Xu & Chen (2001:
319).

A number of interviewees speak of changes to their thinking, ways of working,
and even career paths, occasioned by new technologies.

The Internet and the
rise of communication networks, both these factors, changed the direction
of my career significantly. …This has occupied the last 15 years of
my life.

Over the course of her career, another relates that: 'Â IT changed
how we did everything – from organization workflows that were realigned
by the computer. Instead of being paper-based, we got to do things differently
and more quickly”.

A senior library administrator acknowledges that:

Computers changed the
nature of my work completely – so much of communicating is now done
via the computer – communication with staff, stakeholders, suppliers
… everything. … work is addressed differently in computers.

Younger interviewees suggest that the profession needs better understanding
of new technological developments:

Â and what they can
do within the profession Â how does it all work, for example, XML, digital
library technology, electronic records management, content management Â [the
profession] needs to go deeper into these things.

The online environment with universal use
of computers and other electronic devices has wrought many changes in service
levels and access to information resources. Respondents see the traditional
focus of libraries shifting away from outright ownership of resources (collection
development) to provision of resources made accessible via electronic searching
tools and shared resources via online subscriptions or leasing arrangements.
That delivery methods have changed is hardly challenged, with frequent references
to the use of mobile devices such as, cell phones or personal digital assistants, the Web, and channels other than just looking for a book or a journal
article in a library. One mid-career librarian says expectations of users in
relation to libraries are different than they were in the past, and she questions
cogently: 'What does this mean for libraries when there are so many ways
of using information?' In part response to her own rhetorical question,
she suggests that libraries might best focus on service and delivery by thinking
laterally and being flexible and responsive. Advocates of looking at ICTs as
vehicles for the delivery of information to clients are not only the younger
librarians. One senior manager states:

It is important to understand
that there are different channels for delivering information that can be shared
– the mobile phone, for example, may replace the PC. Information can
be delivered or brought to you on your mobile phone – being aware that
there is more than just the Web – there’s the IPod etc.

Many interviewees, in recognizing the power of electronic information, express
the view that students need to be capable in ICT to deal with digital content.One senior manager in the information resources sector avers that:

The digital world is
a major shift, including the framework of what is now possible, and how to
interact in the Web world. This shift is reflected in the generational gap
between the paper generation and the digital one.

She highlights some of the resultant issues:

The issue of digital
libraries is clearly a challenge – libraries are becoming places for
access to digital documents, but there are huge problems to deal with here
such as, rights of access to the materials, preservation, use (such as who
gets to use the files or documents) issues about authorization and custody
rather than possession; the crux is not the ‘object’, but how
‘objects’ are managed.

The increased growth and access to digital information is highlighted by a senior
academic:

Â part of the access is the availability to the increasing networked information,
not just the type of information, but the places to go to get that information
- obviously underpinned by the Internet.

Core knowledge for information management or library and information science

Respondents have very clear notions of what the core knowledge claims of the
information management or library and information science profession are. Most agree on those areas of knowledge which remain our
unique domain and stress the need to retain and even strengthen these areas.
Many respondents feel quite strongly that not only is information management or library and information science core knowledge
distinct from that of other fields but that it is becoming increasingly valuable
for other information fields, particularly the information systems field, and
for new ‘digital world’ issues. When asked about what distinguishes
information management or library and information science professionals, this response from a library administrator seems to sum
it up:

It is … around information evaluation, organization, management and
access – and the theoretical framework around all that – in this
we run rings around other professionals in our grounding and knowledge about
theory and the basics, such as indexing, representation, and so on.

Another academic who has been in the education
field for many years states his view that:

Â the unique body of knowledge is around how people interact with information; it draws on how information is organized, how people get access to information to do the things they need to do. This is a newer focus on information behaviour. The principles still apply around organization of information.

Many see the core set of knowledge as reasonably coherent across the classic
information fields of librarianship, archives, recordkeeping, or museum curatorship.
Among the core skills and knowledge respondents point out cataloguing, classification
in its many forms (now often labeled as ontology or taxonomy) and aspects of
the curatorial roles of selection and preservation of all information records.
As one educator emphasizes:

information management or library and information science content is so important because the need to manage information is ubiquitous and important – everywhere, not just in libraries.

At the same time as asserting the value of these skills, this educator also
believes that we need 'Â a wholesale re-direction of thinking about
the ways in which we represent documents, manuscripts and records, including
issues relating to classification, cataloguing, descriptions, and metadata.”

Other content added to the traditional subjects includes understanding of the
social implications of information, good retrieval skills, problem solving ability,
and customer service. A recently graduated librarian believes that learning
about the Web should be a core part of our profession and thinks that [librarians]
should not only know the tool well but be able offer something better than other
professions.

More than half of all respondents emphasize the importance of teaching basic
concepts relating to the nature of information. As one mid-career teaching academic
describes it:

The most important components
of the core knowledge set is an understanding of information itself, its properties,
its characteristics, its contexts, and our relationship to information and
our capacity to do all that we need to do to document, describe and share
information.

This view is echoed by educators who think it vital to inculcate in students

Â an understanding of
the way information works, in terms of being a communication process at all
kinds of levels, organizational, individual, etc. Â recognition of information
as a substance, a product in its own right shaped by social forces and society.

Engaged in both information science and systems teaching, this educator believes
that the reference literature of information management or library and information science is strong. In discussing the scope and
relevance of courses for today’s needs, he says:

Â itÂs a case of 'What is old is new again' Â some of the classic things taught as integral parts of library and information science are more important and relevant than ever. For example, document management and all the components of that right through from description of information items, to the subjective knowledge of the documentalist describing the information, and the value-adding they [professional documentalists] bring to that process. Another area is the classic skills of reference service. Some of these things have slipped to the wayside in Australia as we moved into an information systems context. These things are relevant and Â there is room for them in courses as part of broad business programmes.

Communicating with clients is suggested as a core skill for information management or library and information science professionals.
As one respondent expresses it: 'Â interaction with clients is critical Â
this is the difference between the 'I' world and the 'IT' world.'

A number of respondents recommend the introduction of a course on information
behaviour as a general subject for all information professions or specialties.
One respondent puts it succinctly: 'The main game is to get through to students
that the information itself is what matters.'

Having an understanding about how different people approach information, and
learning how to work through people’s needs, are fundamental skills, which
many respondents think essential if information professionals are to meet clients’
demands. One library manager encapsulates this idea:

Â [professionals] need to know how to access all kinds of databases, know
where the information is, look at all channels, contexts.

Educational reforms for information disciplines

Different views and emphases emerge
from the data on how to manage change within
the educational curriculum (see in
Figure 2). Barriers to reform seen
by interviewees arise partly from the structure of the university faculty system,
economically sustainable enrolments, and length of programmes. Another arises
from the labels of librarianship and library science or studies which
no longer seem to fit student expectations or many key employment opportunities
for graduates. One could say that the labelling issue is somewhat of a hot topic.
One senior manager has this to say:

The real challenge in
the profession is how to differentiate ourselves to be unique in the way you
manage, not always doing things the way we used to do … Innovation is
critical in an organisation. It
is not necessarily an efficiency gain, but a value seen in differentiation.

Another interviewee thinks
that:

Â the lines are very
much blurred nowadays Â information organizations [like libraries or museums]
need to be able to respond in a much broader way about markets and where they
position themselves.

Figure 2: Content and programme reforms

An early-career level librarian emphasizes a need to look at structural change,
particularly the identity and role of the library, and of professionals working
in libraries. He regrets that 'a lot of people are still grounded by what
or how it was done in the past' and who seem unwilling to change their roles
or that of the library. He believes the profession needs: 'Â to develop new
ways of present ourselves and the library differently'. This point about
presenting the profession differently is echoed by a senior consultant in the
field:

We need to reconceptualize
what information is – this is a contested area and it needs to be re-thought
because information is conceptualized differently among different professionals/industry/business/IT
– so there is a need for a mutual understanding about what information
is. Issues here include: currency, duplication, space.

In the course of the interview, respondents
were asked to suggest reforms or ways of changing the curriculum to improve
the programmes currently offered in Australia. The overall impression or sense
is that reform and revision of educational programmes are essential in order to
accommodate the inevitable changes brought by
ICTs and digitalization. Many expressed
the view that attention to changes in the field and the marketplace needs
to be ongoing.

Respondents are critical of course structures
and content when asked to specify changes or alternatives to programmes. This
interviewee comments on insufficient work-related preparation:

Would have been better
to have a practical component and an industry component in the course. The
programme did not prepare me for what happened when I took my first job.

One respondent complains about the depth of intellectual content:

The current offerings in library and information science or information management in Australia attempt to cover everything – but not at a deep enough level.

Others believe that depth and content are limited by the duration of courses:

...a one-to-one-and-a-half-year programme can only give an introduction – too superficial really. Not in any way, shape, or form can it properly deliver the content.

In reflecting on possible reforms, some think that information management or library and information science could be given:

Â a great deal more
prominence at government level, even be mandated as part of curriculum. Not
sure how it is to be done.

In reflecting on the scope of current courses
and their relevance for today’s needs, respondents nominate types of reforms
to education that might usefully be pursued. This line of questioning produced
a range of views which are highlighted below.

Arising from the pervasive use of the Internet
and WWW resources, several interviewees voice concern with teaching a form of
information literacy that is focussed on how best to use the host of electronic
resources now available. One respondent with long years of experience in libraries
suggests information literacy is not only important for the general population,
but that:

Â the development of information literacy is vital for success in operating in economic contexts.

Again we hear the concern for students to acquire:

Â a deep understanding
of what the Web means in terms of information, in terms of search engines
and how they work, of how to optimize them and about issues around the deep
Web area, that is, whatÂs there and isnÂt there.

Another senior person in education says that, if she were in charge of universities:

Â everyone would take
a one-day workshop or some other concentrated course on using the Interenet
and the whole Web with a view to instilling some ideas about quality of pages/sites.
To disabuse them that search engines show all of the 1000s of Web pages to
them. Also to show them that many sites have questionable authority Â so [we]
need to teach students to use their critical faculties to identify quality
resources on Web.

Ideas expressed by the younger interviewees stress that the current generation
of users prefer online and interactive information: 'they donÂt want to read
long passages of stuff, in their everyday lives; they go more for online materials'.
In line with this view is the suggestion from a senior educator that ‘digital
content’ should be taught as a course 'through the life cycle of information
creation, retrieval, storing, controlling, disposing, and so on'. Emphasizing
this point, she believes a new digital libraries course should be:

Â a capstone subject
that is basic for all. This area is exciting, fundamental and requires
all the former traditional Information Management skills, such as classification
or taxonomy, and extends the student with digital information sources, ideas
about audience needs, design of Web sites and so on.

Bawden et al’s study (2004) on education and training
in Slovenia and the UK indicated that existing courses were being adapted or
re-designed rather than creating new courses labelled digital library.

The many issues around digitized information concern our interviewees. All agree
that the digital world is a major shift and most are concerned about issues
of copyright, intellectual property, concepts of authenticity, integrity, plagiarism,
ethical behaviour, and protection of records. So great are the concerns relating
to the digitization of information that one researcher and manager believes
that:

Â whole slews of things need to be re-thought; we need to go back to the
conceptual building blocks to consider the ways and the why we do things.

Convergence and multi-disciplinary alliances

The interview schedule raised the issue
of the multiplicity of related information fields and courses preparing graduates
for information professions. Responses to these issues provide the evidence
for developing another NVivo model (see Figure 3) which shows administrative
structures and attributes necessary for change as well as the main themes respondents
identified as ripe for discussion ― divergence and separation of disciplines
and fields, commonalities among them, and the vexed issue of competition among
the fields themselves and universities within the Australian higher education
sector. Respondents also commented on their views about convergence and collaboration
among the spectrum of information disciplines and professions. Other studies
have concluded that collaborative partnerships in teaching are useful (see Buchanan
et al. 2002 re information literacy courses). The possibility of designing
a single stream as a beginning course from which graduates could continue into
specialist courses in a range of fields was canvassed. All these issues were
given serious consideration. Despite not having time to give fully-considered
responses, and although some expressed reservations, most comments were not
completely dismissive of notions of collaboration, cooperation or convergence.

One respondent suggests
that:

Â one would need to deconstruct what is in the core of the different information disciplines to
get any idea of a single course Â I would leave Computer Sciences out because
it is about bits and boxes Â thatÂs not about information management, whereas
information management is on about the stuff in the box and how it behaves.

However, one respondent explodes
vehemently when asked to consider convergence among information-related programmes.

I have no patience with
divergence – there is a commonality among information fields that is
vital and important. They are all essentially the same field with differences
in manifestation; they are within the progressional range of information work.

He is of course talking about similarities and convergence, even emergence.
Another respondent expresses it differently:

It seems to me to be more like emergence. We are almost a meta-discipline
really; we can fit any academic and social context. I’d like to see
less convergence and more emergence – more sharing with other disciplines,
but it is not necessary to blend with other fields administratively.

However, the reality in Australian universities is that a major barrier to bringing
the information fields closer is the faculty administrative system, which divides
information-related courses. Other impediments are academics clinging to course
identities and professionals to specific professional spheres. One interviewee
thinks the lack of convergence is not related to the subject domain:

I’d say that mainly
the cause [of non-convergence] would
be due to the incompatibility of the people running the courses – because
I know that there are informatics faculties in other universities, and that
they work well. Yes, it’s possible to combine them [information
courses] together; it’s not only possible, it’s happening, and
it works in other universities.

Figure 3: Divergence, commonality and competition

In terms of running a single stream, course or programme for all information students,
a senior academic administrator positively identifies medicine as a model, with
its educational programme feeding into various medical colleges and specialties,
such as, pediatrics, obstetrics, or surgery. He points out that each of these
specialisms belongs in the field of medicine, yet they all commence by learning
a common core of knowledge.

The survey results show a lively debate about how to accommodate specialization
within current programmes, that is, on specific areas of academic or occupational
interest. A recurring barrier is the inability to provide for specializations
within the course structure because money is tight and so many programmes in Australia
are too small (in terms of staff numbers and student enrolments) to mount specialist
courses, or even to offer much in the way of electives. In this context, we
note efforts to introduce evidence-based librarianship in the information management curriculum
at Queensland University of Technology (Partridge & Hallam
2006).

The schedule probed to ascertain whether recognition of specific content from
neighboring fields could be accepted as legitimate course credits in information management or library and information science
programmes. A key barrier here is the uncertainty of getting approval from academic
boards. Some spoke about encouraging students to explore their interests, while
recognizing that students need guidance so that what they study is useful to
them. A practicing librarian rails at strictures against students taking subjects
outside the confines of information management or library and information science programmes, saying that it is:

Â critical to let students
undertake courses for credit outside their programme, if they are approved Â
it is part of the work to remain flexible and lateral thinking, bringing other
kinds of thinking into librarianship.

Pie-in-the sky according to another.

Perhaps one could train
undergraduates to learn information (structures and behaviour) and related
philosophy, how to think, and then have them come back at postgraduate level
to learn the management side of things, move to next level … that
would be lovely, but it just won’t happen that way.

Less defeatist, but recognizing the reality of university governance at the
moment, an experienced educator offers this comment:

I see potentially where
areas are not actually competing but are increasingly addressing things we
consider as in the domain of information management. All of them (information
fields) are close for different reasons – and sometimes we use them
as reference disciplines – and at other times, some disciplines use
us as a reference discipline, perhaps not as much as they could. I see a greater
need for more interdisciplinary engagement and I don’t necessarily think
that we will see good examples of that while universities create this internal
competition around domains.

Discussion of results

This study exploring the current situation in education for information in Australia
is one of the few to explore impacts of information technology and digitized information on academia
and the information management or library and information science professions. Analysis to date shows four broad themes emerging
as responses to educational reform. The major themes
identified are impacts brought about by digitization of information, new communication
technologies and electronic/online services, all of which demand reforms to
teaching, education curricula and programmes, and training of graduates for professional
careers and employment. Many sub-themes are identified under these dimensions.

The interviews have provided a rich source of data for analysis on a number
of critical educational issues in Australia. The basic conceptual framework
which emerges from the data highlights the important
triggers, facilitators, and barriers to educational change. The findings
show support for the relevance of traditional subjects of information management or library and information science and
expansion of core knowledge into behavioural aspects of information use, for
the need for specializations or electives, for a stronger focus on digital libraries
and issues in digitization, such as IP, copyright, integrity and authentication
of information.

Our analysis to date reveals that respondents have many ideas about the necessity
for change; however, they did not clearly enunciate pathways to achieve desired
and useful reforms. Indeed, the data reveals respondents express great variation
and even uncertainty about the type and nature of the reforms needed. Some reforms
suggested appear to be tinkering at the edges. All respondents expressed a desire
for better communication and cooperation among all the stakeholders in the information
disciplines. This is an area which is compromised by the competitive nature
of current faculty and administrative structures within Australia’s university
sector. Analysis indicates that information management or library and information science (e.g. library studies, information science,
knowledge management, archives, & records management) continue to be rather
isolated from the broader information domain as a whole leading us to conclude
that attention needs to be paid to the resolution of the relationship between
cognate areas relating to information, particularly given recent programme closures
in Australia. Subsequent analysis will explore respondents’ views about
the lack of electives within disciplinary programmes for information management or library and information science and the need for
more practicum within programmes. The data also show current programmes are unable
to provide students with specializations across current faculty structures.

Conclusion

The rigorous interview methodology and the in-depth data generated are strengths
of this study. The purposive sample was able to elicit views about education
for information from respondents with diverse backgrounds and experience. The
schedule enabled participants to respond freely to the issues raised without
restriction. Furthermore, respondents were encouraged to reflect on their own
experiences, thus enhancing the validity of their responses. These factors ensured
that no issue coded in the content analysis was given more prominence than another.

Despite the small sample size, which prevents generalization of the results,
the study provides plenty of grist for a full discussion or debate of the issues
among information professionals and educators. The difficulties encountered
in these interviews, such as different professionals not talking the same language,
need to be addressed in discussions among educators about curricula and programmes.

The findings indicate that in Australia there is an expressed need for information management or library and information science
curricula reform and revision. Interviewees agreed on the necessity of a rational
adjustment of educational programmes and open discussion among all participants
within the broad information domain. All concurred that many issues have not
been fully acknowledged or addressed. Analysis of the data is ongoing.

Future research to gather more data from respondents in neighboring disciplines
is required in order to generalize results across the broad domain of information
professions and to take account of the fast changing environment. Our research
did not focus on conceptual frameworks for restructuring, although some respondents
made indirect references to this issue. However, any reform remains to be resolved
by committed stakeholders within the education system. In the next phase of
the project, we intend to canvass views of educators about how they see these
urgent concerns of revision and reform of information curricula being addressed.

Acknowledgements

This research is funded by the John Metcalfe Memorial Fund. Both authors
acknowledge the support of the School of Information Systems, Technology and
Management (SISTM) at the University of New South Wales. We also thank the members
of SISTM’s Information Management Research Group for their encouragement
and sound advice on aspects related to this project.

Appendix I:
Some Interview Questions and Prompts

Q1 I’d like to open the interview by asking you to reflect on three
factors of change that you think are important and which have impacted on your
professional career, teaching, practice or working life. What are they, and
how has each affected the way you now do things?

Q2: Reflecting on your own training and education and your preparedness
for the various roles and positions you have had in your career, would you talk
a little about the type of education you received and comment on its applicability
and adequacy for today’s students?

Prompts: How do you view current library and information science education programmes?

Are there any changes or alternatives you would like to see in place of the
current array of courses or programmes for education for information?

Q3 Tapping into your experience as an educator/manager who has been concerned
with information service and delivery:

What are your views about the scope of current courses, programmes or subjects
in relation to their relevance for today’s needs?

Q4 Given that information is a primary driver in the economic order of
the 21st century:

What do you think is important in educating graduates for work in the new information
economy?

Prompts: What are your thoughts about any educational reforms that might
enable new career paths to be developed?

Could you expand on the sorts of reforms that might be pursued?

Q6 Professions have a unique “body of knowledge’ that must
be acquired by those wanting to work in the profession. In your view, is this
the case for information education?

Prompts: Could you briefly outline what you think are the most important
components of learning needed for the information professional?

Q7 A number of disciplines or fields seem to be relevant to LIS education
[example prompts: information systems, business management, knowledge management,
record keeping, archives management, organizational behaviour]. Do you believe
it is possible to outline a single course or programme of education for information?

Prompts: If not, why is it not possible? Could you expand on your views?

To what extent do you believe there is convergence among some of the information-related
fields? Which ones?

To what extent should students in library and information science programmes be permitted to gain credit from
courses/subjects in related disciplines as part of a library or information science degree program? For
example, in information systems or business management?

Q9 Given the ubiquitous nature of computer and information technology
in every arena of work, how important is having staff with information technology
expertise as well as library and information science training?

Prompts: To what extent should information technology be taught as part
of an information education programme? Could you expand on specific aspects of
IT content here?

How important would you say is acquiring knowledge and skill in information
systems and management?

How important is training in the area of communications technology?

How important is it to have training in technical aspects of information retrieval,
automatic indexing and metadata applications?

What topics or how much, would be relevant or useful for information/LIS students
to learn?

Q10 The Internet has made significant changes to the way information
is provided. Is there a need for specific courses on using the Internet for
information delivery in LIS educational programmes?

Prompts: In your view, is it important for information/LIS students to
learn Web page design, information editing and compilation, or Web publishing
skills?

Q14 Steven Schwartz, Vice-Chancellor of Macquarie University has said
that graduates are ill served by a narrow focus on the utilitarian, and business
and employers by the notion that universities exist mainly to confer economic
benefits. Universities are not in the business solely of turning graduates ready-made
for business or specific jobs; rather they are about educating students for
a lifetime of learning and self-fulfilment.

Would you care to comment on this viewpoint in light of education for information
management?